On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> EHLO,
> I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
>
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > > * Closes:#70398
> > I've noticed sort of a trend here lately. Changelog entries are getting
> > more and more ambiguous. Can this stop please? Descriptions and specifics
> > in changelogs are never a bad thing. This sort of entry is of little use
> > and might as well be removed completely.
>
> from wnpp doc I read:
>
> ***
> Of course, the easiest way of closing bugs is to include the appropiate
> entry on the changelog and append '(Closes: bug#nnnnn)' to it. In this
> way, the bug will be closed at the time the new package gets installed
> into the archive.
> ***
>
> from it I can understand that changelog is parsed when installed on the
> archive.
>
Actually the relevant changelog entries are in the .changes file which is
what gets parsed.
> So what's the best way to write a changelog?
> In my opinion is to write somethins like:
>
> * Closes:#9999
> A question on BTS parser
> * other changes ...
>
> does it works?
I think it should though I tend to do it the other way around
* A question on BTS parser (Closes: #9999)
> What about the syntax? is it space|case sensitive?
> Closes: bug#9999
> Closes:#9999
>
I don't have it available right now to chek but I believe the developers
reference contains the exact regular expression used for this.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
